Mandatory Vaccinations And Medical Exemptions

Are you for or against Mandatory Vaccinations

  • For

    Votes: 292 57.4%
  • Against

    Votes: 221 43.4%

  • Total voters
    509

Vintage

Club Legend
Mar 5, 2006
2,614
3,377
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
That's assuming I am 65+ and have comorbidities. My survival rate for Covid is 99.998%. lots of 65+ and sick people have died. But it's the few you f people that do that grab the headlines.
A 1 in 50,000 death rate? You must be very special, I wasn’t aware anyone had that sort of survival probability
 

mouncey2franklin

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 16, 2018
8,644
15,438
AFL Club
North Melbourne
So you trust this source? May I ask why?
Which source are you referring to?

The article provides copious links, including to the AHA:


If you choose not to believe any of them, that is fine by me :thumbsu:

May I ask you why you don't believe them? What do you think they stand to gain from lying about this?
 
Jul 18, 2010
10,045
15,213
Australia.
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
West Perth.
From 100 years ago. Has the science not changed considerably since then?
Trying to follow here....
For some cancers, the survival rate has increased dramatically over the last 30 years. Childhood leukemia for example has seen a 5 year survival rate of 80% in 1990 rise to 91% by 2015.
Breast cancer studies show similar gains in treatment v no-treatment: "After patients were matched based on their propensity score to receive chemotherapy, the treated group in the period between 1981 and 2008 exhibited a 25% reduction in the relative risk of death compared with the untreated group. This reduction resulted in an absolute survival benefit of 4.5% at 5 years and 6.9% at 10 years. Chemotherapy was also associated with an 18% relative reduction in the risk of distant metastasis".
But does chemo cure all cancer? Nope.
Some chemo is not done with curative intent.
Cancer treatment is quite individualized and depends on many factors. There is no one size fits all.
The absolute key to cancer survivability is early diagnosis. If some cancers are detected early, a multi-modal treatment plan can be done which can give good survival rates....if picked up to late, surgery, chemo, radiotherapy may not cure at all.
 

Gruffles

Club Legend
Feb 25, 2009
1,466
1,927
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
From 100 years ago. Has the science not changed considerably since then?
Yes, that is my point. The science has changed in that chemo/radio treatment options were developed improving 5yr survival rates.

At the start this discussion you said that you believed that the body could fix itself, what has changed since this study that allows the body to do that given it's clear that people couldn't at the time?

You had mentioned that you initially thought chemo/radio were the only options but then did some digging and found some things out that made you decide these treatment methods didn't work. Given this is the change in cancer science since the data in the article, wouldn't that indicate that it is working as intended? Can you please show me what you found in your digging?

Also, can you please show me evidence of scientists not actually working on chemical treatment R&D and clinical trials?

I've asked for these a number of times now.
 
Oct 29, 2017
18,407
35,552
AFL Club
Richmond
I have an underlying health issue (asthma) that I've been hospitalised with before. But not for years, though I still take daily medication and am totally fine to play sports, exercise, etc.

Being a respiratory condition I'm probably f’ed if I catch covid. But I guess that doesn't matter and I'm just an unhealthy weakling because I have an underlying health issue.

The way people wave off anyone who dies from covid while having some pre existing health issue is sickening. Its like they're a lesser person and their death doesn't matter.

Literally, some of them advocate to just let the virus rip because only people with an underlying health issue will suffer. Never mind that so many are natural born issues and not lifestyle related.

Whenever I see that argument, I just send whatever they said straight to the bin. That blatant disregard for people you deem physically unworthy should void you from any discussion. Its an entirely other level to simply a differing opinion.
Hoping no thunderstorm asthma today, tiger brother.

Stay safe everyone.
 
Jul 18, 2010
10,045
15,213
Australia.
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
West Perth.
Yes, that is my point. The science has changed in that chemo/radio treatment options were developed improving 5yr survival rates.

At the start this discussion you said that you believed that the body could fix itself, what has changed since this study that allows the body to do that given it's clear that people couldn't at the time?

You had mentioned that you initially thought chemo/radio were the only options but then did some digging and found some things out that made you decide these treatment methods didn't work. Given this is the change in cancer science since the data in the article, wouldn't that indicate that it is working as intended? Can you please show me what you found in your digging?

Also, can you please show me evidence of scientists not actually working on chemical treatment R&D and clinical trials?

I've asked for these a number of times now.
We are right off the covid track :)
I am trying to follow the chemo discussion....If he said "Chemo doesnt always work and sometimes it just prolongs life but makes the prolonging of life worse because of side effects", I would not disagree. In some circumstances that is the case, but not in all.
Some cancers have good curative intent, some dont. It depends on many factors (tumor size, mets, type of cancer etc).
Some people might look at a survival benefit of 5% with chemo v no chemo and think thats great!....others might thinks thats not so great....
The difficulty with cancer research is ethically you would not do placebo based trials, meaning chemo v placebo, very often. Simply because its unethical to not treat. What generally happens would be "chemo and new chemo" v "chemo v placebo". So that both groups are been treated, but one group is getting new treatment and the other old treatment.

,
 
Aug 25, 2005
11,640
16,684
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Which source are you referring to?

The article provides copious links, including to the AHA:


If you choose not to believe any of them, that is fine by me :thumbsu:

May I ask you why you don't believe them? What do you think they stand to gain from lying about this?

I didn't say I didn't trust them

I'm curious as to why you blindly trust the AHA?
 

Gruffles

Club Legend
Feb 25, 2009
1,466
1,927
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
We are right off the covid track :)
I am trying to follow the chemo discussion....If he said "Chemo doesnt always work and sometimes it just prolongs life but makes the prolonging of life worse because of side effects", I would not disagree. In some circumstances that is the case, but not in all.
Some cancers have good curative intent, some dont. It depends on many factors (tumor size, mets, type of cancer etc).
Some people might look at a survival benefit of 5% with chemo v no chemo and think thats great!....others might thinks thats not so great....
The difficulty with cancer research is ethically you would not do placebo based trials, meaning chemo v placebo, very often. Simply because its unethical to not treat. What generally happens would be "chemo and new chemo" v "chemo v placebo". So that both groups are been treated, but one group is getting new treatment and the other old treatment.

I have actually nearly posted an apology to the thread for this discussion given it's drifted so far away from covid. I'd be happy to start a new thread on it! It began from a statement about having confidence in the body being able to fix itself, which may have initially referenced the fact that there is a high recovery rate from covid. I asked about that in reference to a different condition (which is where cancer was brought up), yada yada yada, and now we are here.

There was an early comment about why there hadn't been any chemo vs placebo studies, which I replied that I felt that would be an unethical approach given you'd be denying potential life saving treatment to a group of patients. Thanks for clarifying my thought!
 

mouncey2franklin

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 16, 2018
8,644
15,438
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Trying to follow here....
For some cancers, the survival rate has increased dramatically over the last 30 years. Childhood leukemia for example has seen a 5 year survival rate of 80% in 1990 rise to 91% by 2015.
The study you cite, does it use a double blind methodology? Is there a control group?
 

mouncey2franklin

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 16, 2018
8,644
15,438
AFL Club
North Melbourne
I didn't say I didn't trust them
I asked if the hospitals were getting more cash for 'covid' diagnoses.

I then provided you with a source which suggests they do indeed make more cash for these diagnoses.

Are you going to dispute this? Just be upfront, are you disputing it?

This isn't about me, it is about the facts. Please try to focus on the facts.
 

Gruffles

Club Legend
Feb 25, 2009
1,466
1,927
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
Cool so where are the double blind, controlled studies from the past 20 years or so?
You link them, I'll read them :thumbsu:

I think it's time that you start contributing to the conversation. This is turning into me continually chasing information for you with you avoiding any sort of question you are asked. This needs to become a two-way conversation rather than an "interview". Answer some questions and the discussion can continue. The rest of my post that you decided not to quote was:

At the start this discussion you said that you believed that the body could fix itself, what has changed since this study that allows the body to do that given it's clear that people couldn't at the time (of the study I posted)? (What has changed in the human body to allow this?)

You had mentioned that you initially thought chemo/radio were the only options but then did some digging and found some things out that made you decide these treatment methods didn't work. Given this is the change in cancer science since the data in the article, wouldn't that indicate that it is working as intended? Can you please show me what you found in your digging?

Also, can you please show me evidence of scientists not actually working on chemical treatment R&D and clinical trials?

I've asked for these a number of times now
(while continuing to answer the questions you pose to me).
 
Last edited:
Jul 18, 2010
10,045
15,213
Australia.
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
West Perth.
The study you cite, does it use a double blind methodology? Is there a control group?
Do you think a randomized controlled double-blinded study into, lets say small cell lung cancer, would meet ethics approval if the methodology was "Cyclophosphamide v placebo"??
 

Profop

Club Legend
Oct 20, 2021
1,606
5,177
AFL Club
Richmond
mouncey2franklin I’m also wondering who in society you do trust? And it your distrust purely in the health related fields?

Clearly you don’t trust the government, you don’t trust the media, you don’t trust scientists and you don’t trust medical professionals.

With the distrust of media, science and government does that extend to other things (climate change, the economy ect.)?

What’s really bizarre is that this whole discussion is on an AFL forum because if you think the government, scientists, journalists and medical professionals are all lying to society all the time I can’t understand how you could believe the AFL was all above board.
 
Oct 20, 2004
17,078
20,860
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
Does she do the trials herself? Be honest.
Yes. The participants come in, they are accommodated in what is, effectively, a large hospital ward. My partner is a doctor, so she or the nursing staff administer the doses and ensure that any reactions are observed, documented, and most importantly of all, managed.
 
Feb 9, 2009
17,159
23,041
Footscray
AFL Club
Richmond
Hoping no thunderstorm asthma today, tiger brother.

Stay safe everyone.
cheers, strangely enough ive never suffered it. and neither have other people i know who have asthma. i believe its called thunderstorm asthma because the symptoms are the same, but i think its actually more like an extreme hayfever. i take daily antihistamines for other things as well, so that probably helps.

but enough about my medical history :p :thumbsu:
 
Aug 25, 2005
11,640
16,684
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
I asked if the hospitals were getting more cash for 'covid' diagnoses.

I then provided you with a source which suggests they do indeed make more cash for these diagnoses.

Are you going to dispute this? Just be upfront, are you disputing it?

This isn't about me, it is about the facts. Please try to focus on the facts.
I'm not disputing anything.

I'm just trying to understand why there's blind trust toward some sources, and what seems to be blind distrust for others.

It's an interesting, yet very common occurrence.
 
Feb 9, 2009
17,159
23,041
Footscray
AFL Club
Richmond
mouncey2franklin

Stop avoiding the question. Do you ever go to the doctor?
mouncey2franklin

Asking for the third time, im interested as to whether your distrust of medical science, the scientists and the drugs they make is consistent and extends to all parts of your life, or if you pick and choose when to trust medicine.

or have you blocked me because its an uncomfortable question which challenges you and exposes a hypocrisy in your opinions?
 
Apr 23, 2016
30,507
42,667
AFL Club
Essendon
I think it's time that you start contributing to the conversation. This is turning into me continually chasing information for you with you avoiding any sort of question you are asked. This needs to become a two-way conversation rather than an "interview". Answer some questions and the discussion can continue. The rest of my post that you decided not to quote was:

At the start this discussion you said that you believed that the body could fix itself, what has changed since this study that allows the body to do that given it's clear that people couldn't at the time (of the study I posted)? (What has changed in the human body to allow this?)

You had mentioned that you initially thought chemo/radio were the only options but then did some digging and found some things out that made you decide these treatment methods didn't work. Given this is the change in cancer science since the data in the article, wouldn't that indicate that it is working as intended? Can you please show me what you found in your digging?

Also, can you please show me evidence of scientists not actually working on chemical treatment R&D and clinical trials?

I've asked for these a number of times now
(while continuing to answer the questions you pose to me).

In case you're not aware, mouncey2franklin was the one crowing about how free Bulgaria was. Whilst being found to be lying by Power Raid (or Total Power) who actually lives in Bulgaria contradicting pretty much everything mouncey2franklin was declaring to be true and factual. A country which also now has one of the highest death rates in Europe.

He's also now refusing to accept kingswood's fairly well argued answer by setting the bar for evidence so unbelievably high that it can never be reached. Meanwhile, he's decided that unproven pseudoscience entirely disproves the entire approach we take to dealing with cancer.

If people want to see what bad faith posting looks like, read mouncey2franklin's posting.
 
Apr 23, 2016
30,507
42,667
AFL Club
Essendon
They do what they are paid to do.

So do auto mechanics. So do plumbers. So do janitors. So do engineers.

Funnily enough, when I pay any one of them to do their job they tend to do it in good faith to a reasonable standard. My car runs, my toilet flushes, my office is clean, my bridges don't collapse.
 
Feb 9, 2009
17,159
23,041
Footscray
AFL Club
Richmond
So do auto mechanics. So do plumbers. So do janitors. So do engineers.

Funnily enough, when I pay any one of them to do their job they tend to do it in good faith to a reasonable standard. My car runs, my toilet flushes, my office is clean, my bridges don't collapse.
personally i spend all day on bigfooty instead of doing what im paid to do ;)






ps: boss, thats a joke
 
Back